Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

truecrypt.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 20 posts

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#11

Post by wcoenen »

jrockway wrote: post #5
gecko wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any real alternative?

dm-crypt. (If you look at Wikipedia's crypto-disk-software comparision page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_disk_encryption_s... , you'll see that dm-crypt/cryptsetup/LUKS has pretty much all the features you would care about. Hidden containers would be nice, though.)

I was going to say that truecrypt has the advantage of windows support, which is why I switched from dm-crypt to truecrypt.

But I did some googling before hitting "reply", and apparently you can also mount dm-crypt volumes on windows with FreeOTFE. I guess I should have done some more research before switching.

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#12

Post by gecko »

jrockway wrote: post #5
gecko wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any real alternative?

dm-crypt. (If you look at Wikipedia's crypto-disk-software comparision page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_disk_encryption_s... , you'll see that dm-crypt/cryptsetup/LUKS has pretty much all the features you would care about. Hidden containers would be nice, though.)

Is there something similar that also runs on OS X? dm-crypt looks mountable on Windows, but something that I can use on all three would be very nice.

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#13

Post by bosch »

innoncent wrote: post #9
marchdown wrote: post #3

There are several significant problems with TrueCrypt. Somehow, they fall into different domains, so for most users only one of them really matters. For FOSS-champions thing is that TrueCrypt developers are sneaky and don't accept contributions, so that in practice there is little outside control, and "given enough eyeballs are bugs are shallow" doesn't quite work. For technical users, admins and frugal geeks TrueCry…

You forgot about their lack of public source code repository. Talk about significant problems for an "open source" project! Go try and download the old 6.2 or 6.1 versions. If you feel bold, go ask for a copy in their forum, or better yet, offer old TrueCrypt source code for download. They scare the hell out of me. They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. No I'm not paranoid, I speak…

I'm trying to figure out how you mean. Are you saying this could be foreign countries building it for a way in to US data or the US building it as an easy way in to foreign companies data?

* Assuming the people behind it's development are doing so with a sketchy purpose...

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#14

Post by marchdown »

innoncent wrote: post #9
marchdown wrote: post #3

There are several significant problems with TrueCrypt. Somehow, they fall into different domains, so for most users only one of them really matters. For FOSS-champions thing is that TrueCrypt developers are sneaky and don't accept contributions, so that in practice there is little outside control, and "given enough eyeballs are bugs are shallow" doesn't quite work. For technical users, admins and frugal geeks TrueCry…

You forgot about their lack of public source code repository. Talk about significant problems for an "open source" project! Go try and download the old 6.2 or 6.1 versions. If you feel bold, go ask for a copy in their forum, or better yet, offer old TrueCrypt source code for download. They scare the hell out of me. They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. No I'm not paranoid, I speak…

I've never noticed that their address is only given as a picture, it's not searchable. See for yourself: google.com/search?q=site:truecrypt.org+Henderson, NV.

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#15

Post by [deleted] »

bosch wrote: post #13
innoncent wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot about their lack of public source code repository. Talk about significant problems for an "open source" project! Go try and download the old 6.2 or 6.1 versions. If you feel bold, go ask for a copy in their forum, or better yet, offer old TrueCrypt source code for download. They scare the hell out of me. They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. No I'm not paranoid, I speak…

I'm trying to figure out how you mean. Are you saying this could be foreign countries building it for a way in to US data or the US building it as an easy way in to foreign companies data? * Assuming the people behind it's development are doing so with a sketchy purpose...

[deleted]

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#16

Post by Encosia »

innoncent wrote: post #9
marchdown wrote: post #3

There are several significant problems with TrueCrypt. Somehow, they fall into different domains, so for most users only one of them really matters. For FOSS-champions thing is that TrueCrypt developers are sneaky and don't accept contributions, so that in practice there is little outside control, and "given enough eyeballs are bugs are shallow" doesn't quite work. For technical users, admins and frugal geeks TrueCry…

You forgot about their lack of public source code repository. Talk about significant problems for an "open source" project! Go try and download the old 6.2 or 6.1 versions. If you feel bold, go ask for a copy in their forum, or better yet, offer old TrueCrypt source code for download. They scare the hell out of me. They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. No I'm not paranoid, I speak…

     They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada.
The address listed on their website appears to be an office in a pretty mundane Vegas suburb, surrounded by restaurants and small businesses. Am I missing something?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=375+n.+stephanie+st.+suite+141...

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#17

Post by briansmith »

wcoenen wrote: post #11
jrockway wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dm-crypt. (If you look at Wikipedia's crypto-disk-software comparision page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_disk_encryption_s... , you'll see that dm-crypt/cryptsetup/LUKS has pretty much all the features you would care about. Hidden containers would be nice, though.)

I was going to say that truecrypt has the advantage of windows support, which is why I switched from dm-crypt to truecrypt. But I did some googling before hitting "reply", and apparently you can also mount dm-crypt volumes on windows with FreeOTFE. I guess I should have done some more research before switching.

Why not use BitLocker?

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#18

Post by reduxredacted »

kgo wrote: post #10
iuytfrdsfgh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>ironkey, and you'll get real hardware encryption as well. Perhaps, or perhaps they just XOR your data with your passwd like a certain tape maker did for their super hardware AES mil-spec encryption.

Well here's what they said about that when it happened: https://www.ironkey.com/usb-flash-drive-flaw-exposed Of course, like anything, they could have other unknown vulnerabilities. But like they say in the video on that link, they're a security company that makes a storage product, opposed to a storage company making a security product.

they're a security company that makes a storage product, opposed to a storage company making a security product.

I laughed a bit thinking of extreme trade off in those two statements (so allow me to respectfully embellish [is that possible?]):

Security company makes a storage product: It's secure because they have no idea how to make a storage product and therefore your data is not actually stored anywhere that it can be retrieved in the event that you've provided the correct key.

Storage company makes a security product: The data is stored properly. It is then encrypted using whatever sample code was discovered in a search for the acronym "AES" with a bunch of redundancy in the event that something with the physical media fails. This redundancy is stored in the clear.

A vulnerability in storage results in inaccessible data. A vulnerability in security results in overly accessible data.

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#19

Post by borism »

Encosia wrote: post #16
innoncent wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot about their lack of public source code repository. Talk about significant problems for an "open source" project! Go try and download the old 6.2 or 6.1 versions. If you feel bold, go ask for a copy in their forum, or better yet, offer old TrueCrypt source code for download. They scare the hell out of me. They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. No I'm not paranoid, I speak…

They do now advertise a US address next to some Air Force base in Nevada. The address listed on their website appears to be an office in a pretty mundane Vegas suburb, surrounded by restaurants and small businesses. Am I missing something? http://maps.google.com/maps?q=375+n.+stephanie+st.+suite+141...

I wouldn't trust anything coming out of Vegas.

Re: TrueCrypt 7.0 released, now with hardware-accelerated AES support

#20

Post by vetinari »

briansmith wrote: post #17
wcoenen wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to say that truecrypt has the advantage of windows support, which is why I switched from dm-crypt to truecrypt. But I did some googling before hitting "reply", and apparently you can also mount dm-crypt volumes on windows with FreeOTFE. I guess I should have done some more research before switching.

Why not use BitLocker?

Not every edition supports BitLocker. Professional for example does not.
Post reply on HN